Back during last year's presidential campaign, there was a lot of chatter about whether President OBama received more and undo bad press because of his race. I took the position that I thought not and that historically, POTUS was actually being treated extremely well by the press.

Let's zip ahead....is there anyone that still doubts that POTUS OBama was treated well? Has the past 8 months shown you what it is like to really get treated badly by the press and obviously it has nothing to do with race....right? Or maybe it does.

I am sure you have heard/seen the comments she has made. They are blatant, unquestionably made by her with no backtracking or explanations given since. So, they are obviously what she believes and wants people to hear about. We also know that ESPN has fined/suspended and fired other on air personnel for actions/statements that I believe most would agree pale in comparison to those made by Hill. So I ask....

- Why is this all kind of a hush/hush "controversy" ? She is a well know on air personality yet I don't see much furor being made.

- Why the double standard by ESPN? Could it be because that they are the left wing, liberal station that detractors have said they are for a while so only conservative views get squashed?

I could go on but I think the point is obvious. Curious about what people's thoughts are and whether any of the people that were so adamant about how POTUS OBama was treated badly have now changed their viewpoints?

- Me being the resident optimist around this cesspool of doom and gloom, StevoStarks, circa 2019

Back during last year's presidential campaign, there was a lot of chatter about whether President OBama received more and undo bad press because of his race. I took the position that I thought not and that historically, POTUS was actually being treated extremely well by the press.

Let's zip ahead....is there anyone that still doubts that POTUS OBama was treated well? Has the past 8 months shown you what it is like to really get treated badly by the press and obviously it has nothing to do with race....right? Or maybe it does.

One would have to be honest about Trump inflicting many of his own wounds. I'd also acknowledge that mass media leans liberal and this definitely amplifies his errors.

However, Obama had no control over being of mixed heritage (thanks Obama Sr.). Obama's treatment was partially based on race, yes. The effigies, pixies, racially charged memes and disrespect were all about that. But other ill-treatment came from criticism of policies and proposals - that's fair game to me.

I can disagree with a president without personal attacks. Both 44 and 45 experience that, but come on dc - this guy is unknowledgeable, unaware and unconcerned about many important things. And THAT deserves ridicule because my country is looking stupid AF right now.

The last thing I want to do is have any kind of political discussion concerning either Trump or OBama. No sense inn wasting any time there I probably was not very clear so I will keep anything not to the point out of it this time

What I was wondering most about was/is:

- Why is this all kind of a hush/hush "controversy" ? She is a well know on air personality yet I don't see much furor being made.

- Why the double standard by ESPN? Could it be because that they are the left wing, liberal station that detractors have said they are for a while so only conservative views get squashed?

- Me being the resident optimist around this cesspool of doom and gloom, StevoStarks, circa 2019

Mr. Glass wrote:One would have to be honest about Trump inflicting many of his own wounds. I'd also acknowledge that mass media leans liberal and this definitely amplifies his errors.

However, Obama had no control over being of mixed heritage (thanks Obama Sr.). Obama's treatment was partially based on race, yes. The effigies, pixies, racially charged memes and disrespect were all about that. But other ill-treatment came from criticism of policies and proposals - that's fair game to me.

I can disagree with a president without personal attacks. Both 44 and 45 experience that, but come on dc - this guy is unknowledgeable, unaware and unconcerned about many important things. And THAT deserves ridicule because my country is looking stupid AF right now.

I am not sure I was clear so I will take the hit on that. I did't want to go down the street of any kind of discussion specifically about OBama or Trump. What I was more referring to specifically were Jemele Hill comments:

However, Obama had no control over being of mixed heritage (thanks Obama Sr.). Obama's treatment was partially based on race, yes. The effigies, pixies, racially charged memes and disrespect were all about that. But other ill-treatment came from criticism of policies and proposals - that's fair game to me.

If you read the comments, they have nothing to do with policy. They are a personal attack. To me, I believe that there may not be a worse insult to a white person, especially in today's climate, as calling them a "white supremacist" ....never mind that the person you called that is the POTUS. I remember well a comment made about the POTUS being on a level that they deserve to be treated with respect regardless of your opinion of them. Of course, that comment was made about POTUS OBama so perhaps things are different now.

As to this:

The effigies, pixies, racially charged memes and disrespect were all about that.

You mean like this:

Ok, I will bite again Here are two examples of nationally known people, one an entertainer the other a host on ESPN Sports Center doing exactly what you said happened to POTUS OBama. These are not random Facebook memes or obscure left wing websites doing this. Yet, no rebuke for Jemele Hill. I can put numerous examples (just ask if curious) of people fired for doing much less about POTUS OBama.

- Me being the resident optimist around this cesspool of doom and gloom, StevoStarks, circa 2019

@ dc - On the ESPN situ - IMO there is a time and place for commentary of this nature. ESPN doesn't seem to be the medium however, many Americans were also angered back in 1968 when Smith and Carlos raised their fists in defiance of human rights violations in the U.S. (during the Olympics hosted by Mexico). Freedom of speech does not come with the caveat of when or where, and I have 103 other channels I can turn to if I'm not trying to hear Jemele Hill's rant.

Some Americans are afraid/offended/uncomfortable with dialog on race. I get that (I hate when erectile dysfunction commercials come on TV) but uncomfortable dialog makes us stronger. I need to hear how a Kirk Shilling feels in order to understand his point of view. Only after hearing him can I conclude that he makes a good point or he's a fucking idiot. Same for Jemele. It would have been better to have someone there to debate her point of view. That might be my biggest issue with the network. Hell, have Kornheiser and Wilbon mix it up.

On the BO/DJT situ:

dcapodic wrote:If you read the comments, they have nothing to do with policy. They are a personal attack. To me, I believe that there may not be a worse insult to a white person, especially in today's climate, as calling them a "white supremacist" ....never mind that the person you called that is the POTUS. I remember well a comment made about the POTUS being on a level that they deserve to be treated with respect regardless of your opinion of them. Of course, that comment was made about POTUS OBama so perhaps things are different now.

Carl Paladino (GOP Gubernatorial candidate) - "I'd like her (FLOTUS) to return to being a male and let loose in the outback of Zimbabwe where she lives comfortably in a cave with Maxie, the gorilla,"

You're seriously trying to draw equivalency between these two types of comments? One statement can be quantified based on past actions, comments and even recent EOs. The other statement not so much. This logic sounds dangerously close to the "both sides" comment made about Charlottesville. I just can’t. The office should be respected without doubt, but what personal things would you point to showing Obama disrespected the office? What personal things would you point to showing DJT disrespects the office? A while back Bill Maher made a racially insensitive comment on his show. Immediately after a heartfelt apology he invited Ice Cube on and took his virtual lumps for said gaff. Today, nobody is calling Bill a White Supremacist. Why? Because the pattern does not exist. His actions before and after the comment do not indicate racism. Juxtapose that with DJT. Look at his cheerleaders. Look at his policies. Check out his rallies on YT. Look at how he feeds off of it. Look at his staff members and their backgrounds.

Mr. Glass wrote:@ dc - On the ESPN situ - IMO there is a time and place for commentary of this nature. ESPN doesn't seem to be the medium however, many Americans were also angered back in 1968 when Smith and Carlos raised their fists in defiance of human rights violations in the U.S. (during the Olympics hosted by Mexico). Freedom of speech does not come with the caveat of when or where, and I have 103 other channels I can turn to if I'm not trying to hear Jemele Hill's rant.

Some Americans are afraid/offended/uncomfortable with dialog on race. I get that (I hate when erectile dysfunction commercials come on TV) but uncomfortable dialog makes us stronger. I need to hear how a Kirk Shilling feels in order to understand his point of view. Only after hearing him can I conclude that he makes a good point or he's a fucking idiot. Same for Jemele. It would have been better to have someone there to debate her point of view. That might be my biggest issue with the network. Hell, have Kornheiser and Wilbon mix it up.

Carl Paladino (GOP Gubernatorial candidate) - "I'd like her (FLOTUS) to return to being a male and let loose in the outback of Zimbabwe where she lives comfortably in a cave with Maxie, the gorilla,"

You're seriously trying to draw equivalency between these two types of comments? One statement can be quantified based on past actions, comments and even recent EOs. The other statement not so much. This logic sounds dangerously close to the "both sides" comment made about Charlottesville. I just can’t. The office should be respected without doubt, but what personal things would you point to showing Obama disrespected the office? What personal things would you point to showing DJT disrespects the office? A while back Bill Maher made a racially insensitive comment on his show. Immediately after a heartfelt apology he invited Ice Cube on and took his virtual lumps for said gaff. Today, nobody is calling Bill a White Supremacist. Why? Because the pattern does not exist. His actions before and after the comment do not indicate racism. Juxtapose that with DJT. Look at his cheerleaders. Look at his policies. Check out his rallies on YT. Look at how he feeds off of it. Look at his staff members and their backgrounds.

I think you know i enjoy and respect your posts and comments so I feel comfortable saying this....what I had hoped I would hear is that people thought yes, this was an obvious show of double standards and should be dealt with as such. If you took the politics out of it, it is about as obvious as it gets. But what happens in these situations is that since the media is, as you have pointed out yourself, liberal and left leaning, it is not calling her out hence many are happy just to let it die and consider it a base to build form for even meaner and more personal attacks. Let's not for a minute think that this is the only personal attack on Trump by a celebrity. The list is long and even went as far as to attack his son.

Carl Paladino (GOP Gubernatorial candidate) - "I'd like her (FLOTUS) to return to being a male and let loose in the outback of Zimbabwe where she lives comfortably in a cave with Maxie, the gorilla,"

You're seriously trying to draw equivalency between these two types of comments?

Huh? Actually no I never even mentioned the second quote and doing this type of thing is just another discussion style that dirties the waters. Why would you go there? This is exactly the type of thing that people do when they are trying to dodge the real subject. I am not saying you did this but you are attributing something to me that I never said.

If you are gonna go there then did you miss the pic of the severed head or the POTUS's son being called autistic. Even if he were why would anyone ever go there. But, I didn't bring this stuff up.

Sorry I brought up the subject.

- Me being the resident optimist around this cesspool of doom and gloom, StevoStarks, circa 2019

I too enjoy your posts dc. I find you to be willing and fair and I want to be the same way. The severed head photo is shocking and inappropriate. I accept that wrong is wrong no matter which side I agree with. The media is a very powerful tool (as we're discovering in the news each day). Manipulation towards the right choices should be the ethical goal of them all, but clearly that's not always the case.

dcapodic wrote:- Why is this all kind of a hush/hush "controversy" ? She is a well know on air personality yet I don't see much furor being made.

I guess I'm having a hard time understanding why you think it's a big deal? I've read/heard similar comments from people a lot more famous and far-reaching than her. In journalism accuracy and sustained truth seems to be the criteria for credibility, at least in part. But sometimes the truth is not always clear and journalists make assumptions based on the evidence presented. And dc, there are at least a handful of things that indicate that he IS slanted in his views about certain Americans. At least a handful of things in his past that point to misogyny, racism and classism. It would have been fair to have someone challenge her viewpoints, but there is some substance there don't you think?

dcapodic wrote:- Why the double standard by ESPN? Could it be because that they are the left wing, liberal station that detractors have said they are for a while so only conservative views get squashed?

Yes. It's unfair that the conservative voice is not equal to that of the liberal voice. I wonder why though? Is it because there is no profit in it? Personally I think conservatism needs to be repackaged as more inclusive to all. The GOP has failed miserably at this and the brand suffers because of it. IMO, Christian conservatism as become an oxymoron. What are your thoughts?

Glass, I feel like you are missing the point. You are so intent on the accuracy of what she said that you are not seeing that in her role she should not be expressing a personal political viewpoint at all. Think about it, Shilling was fired, Linda Cohn suspended and there is a long list of folks that have been reprimanded for similar or less. ESPN has laid the groundwork from past examples that this type of thing will not be tolerated. Yet, with Hill it barely even gets a mention. Why? They suspended and then fired a white/male in Shilling for less. They suspended a white/female in Cohn for less. You tell me what the difference is here. No one questions the voracity of what Shilling or Cohn said, just that they said it. These are not journalists reporting on political news. These are sports personalities that did these things on their own time.

"IMO, Christian conservatism as become an oxymoron. What are your thoughts?"

This is a whole other subject and I don't want to go down that rathole when this one, more obvious seems to be beyond common ground.

"Yes. It's unfair that the conservative voice is not equal to that of the liberal voice."

Have you looked at who the president is or the balance between the House and Senate. Evidently their word is getting through to someone cause they seem to be getting a lot of votes.

You seem to want to drag me down a path of a bigger discussion and i really just wanted to use this example as a microcosm of what seems to be occurring in the media and on the left in general. Hypocrisy seems to be the word of the day. I hate to overuse it yet I am not sure there is one more accurate to describe what is taking place. Why is the GOP in power in so many places? Maybe it is because there are a LOT of lifelong Dems like myself that cannot tolerate the blatant hypocrisy of our former party. The example I point out is right on point. Your "Christian" question is on point. We seem to have decided that there are now preferred political stances to allow to become mainstream. There are preferred religions that are promoted and religions that are held up as examples of past mistakes and "hidden" agendas. The party of "free speech" has become the party of censorship, actually sending out "brute squads" to physically enforce their censorship. Think about that for a moment.

Back to the original post....it is called hypocrisy. She is not being judged by the accuracy of what has been said but the rules of the media organization that she works for and that they have shown publicly and enforced in the past to set standards.

Glass....you can't support a person or cause just beacue it fits into your racial/socioeconomic/religous/whatever group. When someone is wrong, they are wrong. If we cannot say this then we are party to the age old example:

One day I came upon a man, he was looking into the bright, blue sky. He said to me isn't that a wonderful green sky we are having today. I looked at him, then looked up, then back at him. I began to say something when another man walked up and said, wow will you look at the gorgeous green sky today. I was puzzled until yet a third person walked up and looked into the sky and began to speak. I stopped them short and said, a wonderful green sky today isn't it. He looked at me and said, What are you nuts the sky is blue and walked away laughing.

Is the sky blue or green Glass?

- Me being the resident optimist around this cesspool of doom and gloom, StevoStarks, circa 2019

I get what you're saying dc. A double standard does exist and it cannot be defended. I went back to check on what Shilling and Cohn said, and Hill should have met the same fate as the others. Right or wrong, unfounded or not, I recognize the double standard and this is not fair.

But stopping there is like saying the Knicks won a basketball game because they scored 40 points in the first quarter. "Biting on this one" may have been a clear cut opportunity to further highlight ESPN (and mass media) for its bias, but are you willing to play three more quarters?

1. How long has the media ignored inner-city policing in this country?

2. How long has right-wing media demonized people of color?

3. How long will the right-wing media be given a pass (although as you stated, Legislative, Judicial and Executive branches are all red - thus confirming their influence) while they ignore the indicators of racism all around them?

I'm curious about your perspective. Is the right without bias? Are you speaking out as adamantly when they are? Who on the right provides dialog on these matters (before being forced):

- Attacked and stereotyped a Muslim Gold Star Mom.

- Said he prefers Jews rather than blacks counting his money as blacks are lazy.

- Said an American born judge was unfair simply because his parents were from Mexico.

Mr. Glass wrote:I get what you're saying dc. A double standard does exist and it cannot be defended. I went back to check on what Shilling and Cohn said, and Hill should have met the same fate as the others. Right or wrong, unfounded or not, I recognize the double standard and this is not fair.

But stopping there is like saying the Knicks won a basketball game because they scored 40 points in the first quarter. "Biting on this one" may have been a clear cut opportunity to further highlight ESPN (and mass media) for its bias, but are you willing to play three more quarters?

1. How long has the media ignored inner-city policing in this country?

2. How long has right-wing media demonized people of color?

3. How long will the right-wing media be given a pass (although as you stated, Legislative, Judicial and Executive branches are all red - thus confirming their influence) while they ignore the indicators of racism all around them?

I'm curious about your perspective. Is the right without bias? Are you speaking out as adamantly when they are? Who on the right provides dialog on these matters (before being forced):

- Attacked and stereotyped a Muslim Gold Star Mom.

- Said he prefers Jews rather than blacks counting his money as blacks are lazy.

- Said an American born judge was unfair simply because his parents were from Mexico.

- For 5 years questioned the American citizenship of our 1st black President.

- Declared the Central Park 5 guilty and deserving the death penalty then later did not apologize when DNA proved them innocent.

- Retweets false black crime data from white supremacists!

The President dc! Not some ESPN geek or some washed up unfunny comedian with a bloody rubber head. El Presidente!

Yes, the path of bigger discussion is my goal.

Yes, the path of bigger discussion is my goa

Thanks for the reply Glass and the research into the point of the original thread. To the rest of your post, a lot of that is big stuff and cannot be attacked as a whole. But your question to me:

I'm curious about your perspective. Is the right without bias? Are you speaking out as adamantly when they are? Who on the right provides dialog on these matters (before being forced)

I think the punishment for Shilling and Cohn kinda gives you an idea of what happens to people on the right that speak out.

So you get an idea of where I am coming from with starting this whole thread....I didn't just step into this world of political commenting a year ago as many have when things started heating up with Trump/Clinton. Politics has been kinda a hobby since I was in high school and then especially college. I am a bit older and times were MUCH different but this was the original period of starting to question the govt and the status quo. My first experience was actually supporting Hubert Humphrey when I was in grade school. I supported Democratic causes for most of my life which is why I now consider myself in a good position to understand what truly the Democratic party was/is and should be about. This is why I speak out so much against many of their actions. Don't misunderstand me, to your earlier questions I do not and would never try and defend Trump on a personal level even though he is more a Democrat that Conservative. This is the ironic thing....because he won as a GOP candidate, most peeps on the left just immediately stack up against him whereas he has been a Democrat most of his life. This is one of the main issues within the GOP, the truly conservatives realize that Trump does not represent them and will not back him despite him being at least closer to their ideals than his opponents. Think of it this way...on the left it was so bad the support for Hillary that a socialist almost took her down. A socialist! In the USA!

Ok, sorry I am all over the board today Anyway....I don't think there is actually much of an outlet for conservative news other than Fox and slowly but surely the hardline left is taking them down. To the uninformed leftists, this might seem like nirvana but that prospect is a VERY serious thing. The example i mention here is just a very light example of the power that the left is exhibiting in the media these days. If it continues to grow, it may start to run unchecked. Does it really matter which hardline group, Ultra-lefts or Ultra-rights take control? Either way, we would be (fill in appropriate swear word) . There needs to be a check and balance system in the media as in most places and this is slowly disappearing. As i have discussed in past threads here, This did not happen with POTUS OBama. Was there a lot of crazy stories and one-sided things that happened during his years, yea of course. But that has always happened. Unfortunately, as POTUS OBama drew in a new era and age of people interested in politics (which is a good thing) these folks think politics began in 2008 If you go back and look at what has been written and said about POTUS in the past, What POTUS OBama was experiencing was no worse than that. In fact. i believe strongly that because of the obviously left leaning media during his presidency, he had an easier time with the press. Understand, not "EASY", "EASIER" than let's say George W. for example who was literally called an idiot at every turn. But try and explain that to the newbies of 2008 and all they can talk about is POTUS OBama.

Anyway....I am neither a Trump supporter nor detractor so don't expect me to fight you about him But, it is hard to deal with people that do not understand what they are speaking about or any history of what they are claiming. (This is a general comment, not meant in any way towards you!!) And yea, I get frustrated when something like this with Jemele Hill comes up and people start supporting her, the same people that got on folks for saying bad things about POTUS OBama. The hipocracy gets me even though I don't necessarily disagree with what they say just that they do not suffer the same commentary as their conservative partners.

I am ALWAYS willing to go towards the "path of bigger discussion". Rather than trying to "boil the ocean" though and listing all of those things that you did, what i would present to you as a starting point is to pick a bit of policy as a place to start. This personal stuff just doesn't matter much in the gran scheme of things. Kennedy snuck women into the White House, Clinton was getting BJ's in the oval office, etc, etc....the only time anyone cares is when they want to try and use personal issues to keep the current POTUS from trying to be able to lead the country in the direction he wants. This shouldn't be argued because of personal issue but what is best in policy. So , DACA, Immigration, Paris Climate change....whatever. These are the things that matter and truly effect our future.

- Me being the resident optimist around this cesspool of doom and gloom, StevoStarks, circa 2019

This whole NFL, kneeling,not coming out of locker room, whatever for the National Anthem. When Kapernick started it fine, do what you want. Of course, the media smelling a chance to rake the coals start asking him about it. He comes off, well let me be nice, as not the best representative of the issues he seems to want to support. They take a picture of him at practice, he is wearing socks with Police officers dressed as pigs. They interview him and he wears a shirt in support of Fidel Castro and then makes the comments about how good their health system is in Cuba and their education is free. Then we learn in another interview that he does not vote. So, ok just blank him out. Buuut, this thing keeps draggin' along and like blood in the water the press keeps following it and as an NFL fan it bugs the crap out of me that I keep hearing more about this than the games they should be covering. Then....POTUS has to comment. I get why he uses Twitter but can someone just rip the phone out of the guy's hand or can he put a muzzle between him and the send button before he does this stuff. Now, the media, the public relations folks out there for every liberal organization you ever heard of of coming up with all of these reasons why this stuff happens. Like yea, right!

I don't care about the politics. I don't care about the cause of the day that it is claimed this is supposed to support. This is entertainment, one that we all pay for as a matter of fact. Whether you pay for special services or cable, whatever it hits pretty much anyone in the pocket that watches any kind of television because of the astronomical money paid to the NFL for rights.

I appreciate people's right to protest and I am not writing now to discuss the merits one way or another of the many reasons being put out there for this. I also am not writing to support the people offended by the protest taking the form that it does, whether it is disrespectufl of the flag/anthem, etc. I get booth sides but at this moment, frankly I could care less.

I have played football since I was able to walk. I was lucky enough to have played it at some high levels. Even though my fav team sucks at the moment (Jets) I still get a lot of enjoyment sitting down on a Sunday afternoon and just zoning out to some football.

So, thanks, just thanks. I am done. DONE. I don't need to be preached to by millionaire players telling me how I should think/feel/react and if I don't listen to them that somehow makes me a bad person. I don't need to be preached to about the flag, the national anthem, etc. or else be told I am not a good American. I just want to watch my games in peace and quiet without having to hear and see all of this surrounding noise. I don't want top pay for this and I won't waste my time supporting it. Thanks POTUS for putting gas on an ember and ruining my game. Yes, my game. Sports are as much a part of the fans experience as the players. To me, I would watch if it was a bunch of guys from down the street as long as it was football.

I am frustrated this is happening in sports and this is not to debate anything political. It was bad enough when they started changing the sports to bring in more (and younger) fans. The NBA is turning into a joke but the NFL is beating them to it. What is a penalty any more and why?

Thanks players and a special thanks to the POTUS for not letting is just go but having to escalate it to joke status.

NFL, you are dead to me.

- Me being the resident optimist around this cesspool of doom and gloom, StevoStarks, circa 2019

I've recently decided that I will no longer allow DJT to decide what's relevant/important to me. He's an instigator who's not really talking to me, he's whistling to his base. I'm married dc, so I know the tactics that people use to avoid addressing the real issues - deflection, false equivalencies and even lies. Until I hear something of substance I will continue to expect the absurd and discordant.

Did his prepared teleprompter speech about unity (after 58 killed in Vegas) convince or inspire you in any way?

Back during last year's presidential campaign, there was a lot of chatter about whether President OBama received more and undo bad press because of his race. I took the position that I thought not and that historically, POTUS was actually being treated extremely well by the press.

Let's zip ahead....is there anyone that still doubts that POTUS OBama was treated well? Has the past 8 months shown you what it is like to really get treated badly by the press and obviously it has nothing to do with race....right? Or maybe it does.

I am sure you have heard/seen the comments she has made. They are blatant, unquestionably made by her with no backtracking or explanations given since. So, they are obviously what she believes and wants people to hear about. We also know that ESPN has fined/suspended and fired other on air personnel for actions/statements that I believe most would agree pale in comparison to those made by Hill. So I ask....

- Why is this all kind of a hush/hush "controversy" ? She is a well know on air personality yet I don't see much furor being made.

- Why the double standard by ESPN? Could it be because that they are the left wing, liberal station that detractors have said they are for a while so only conservative views get squashed?

I could go on but I think the point is obvious. Curious about what people's thoughts are and whether any of the people that were so adamant about how POTUS OBama was treated badly have now changed their viewpoints?

This is what it always comes down to....

Attack the POTUS on Twitter, call him a white supremacist, etc....no action. Call out an NFL owner, the league for which ESPN paid billions to air, get suspended.

I don't know why it should get to me but maybe it is just me that thinks this should be the opposite. For this thing that she got suspended for, I agree with her. She just spoke the truth and did not attack anyone nor insult anyone, especially not the POTUS the way she did the first time.

ESPN just keeps making itself look more and more like dirtbags. I definitely don't want to hear anything from them about "this being the second offense" or "she was warned".

This case, ESPN are the dirtbags! NFL I am so glad you are dead to me....ESPN, on life support at best.

- Me being the resident optimist around this cesspool of doom and gloom, StevoStarks, circa 2019

StevoStarks wrote:It makes me sad at how he has divided this country. I'm over this dictatorship.

I could not agree with you more. What ever happened to people being moderate and accepting of differences.

I'm over this dictatorship

Stevo, I so respect you and your posts here that part of me just wants to not respond but then the part of me that is sad/frustrated takes over and wants to point out the obvious....you just called the present administration of the United States a dictatorship and by default, the current POTUS a dictator and you wonder why the country is so divided. Certainly, you can like/dislike anyone or anything you please but when you just condemn the government as a whole and the POTUS so specifically and harshly it makes for finding common ground a bit difficult.

....and this from a life long Democrat. People are just SO SURE they have all the answers....much like the debate about the GOAT NBA player, there is no answer but hopefully people's opinions count and are listened to.

Think of it this way....at least half of the other people in the country feel exactly opposite of what you have expressed here. Right there, I would question why it is i would believe I am so right and they are so wrong. The answer seems pretty obvious, neither is all right and neither is all wrong. But people seem loath to even listen to another's views or opinions and so "dug in" to their own beliefs (even though many cannot even seem to express what they are so they just split along political lines) that they have forgotten that it is ok to like/believe different things, in fact it is natural. Why does everyone insist that we all must think alike and be mirror images of each other.

Any way....sorry for your sadness but unfortunately, IMHO it is statements like yours about the "dictatorship" that just helps to propagate the divide and worsen it.

- Me being the resident optimist around this cesspool of doom and gloom, StevoStarks, circa 2019

I hear you. There have been some similarities between this administration and dictatorships, but I know that term is more of an igniter than a truth. I'm trying to distance myself from politics right now because it's overwhelming me.

And you know what it is Dcap? It's the 24 hours news cycle that has erupted during his tenure. Maybe it has to do with his tweets, but I feel it has more to do with social media. I for one am not on any social media sites, and can't take the constant barrage of "news" that go around on our phones, on the television, in sports, at work, at dinner, in schools. It has seeped into some our escapes, our sanctuaries, and now it's all we talk about.

I need a break.

"Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind."- Dr. Seuss

"Woody was the perfect coach for these mutts." - taowave

"Is he REALLY injured?? A part of me doesnt believe that he is and I think he's just being a bitch. Bitch-nani."- rynyk222

It's a product of social media. People naturally seek approval for their opinions, so they look for others with like-minded thoughts online. The problem is that echo chambers become breeding grounds for ignorance, stupidity, and mob mentality.

Meanwhile, mainstream news media is a business. What gets them business? Covering the ramblings and behaviors of a man whose biography was written by the American Psychiatric Association. He doesn't believe in negative publicity. He doesn't believe in organization or coherence. He doesn't believe in anything other than opposing everything Obama ever did. Even among the few I know who support his presidency, they all wish he would delete Twitter and STFU.

On the other hand, I have a friend who has compared Trump to Hitler on more than one occasion, and that is also not okay. I know why that comparison was made, but it's disrespectful to anybody who lost family in the Holocaust. Trump did not oversee and plan the eradication of 17 million people in the world. Oh, was that not what she meant? Then she shouldn't fucking go there. There are more incompetent bumbling fools with the right to vote, including Trump himself, than actual neo-Nazis in this country. I should know this, since Xavier called me one.

I believe one of the reasons that Godwin's Law exists is because anyone who goes there is too deranged to formulate a logical and rational thought, and in some respects, I feel this way about this friend. These people are less harmful but almost equally obnoxious. I consider them the inverse of Trump, or Trump x (-1). Either way, you don't get to write your own narrative and declare it to be the universal truth because it feeds your ego.

Sadly, this is what passes for discourse these days. This is something I do credit to Trump, because he is a divider, not a uniter. He's only concerned about appeasing his supporters and fuck everybody else because everybody else isn't going to support his egotistical bullshit, but appeasing his supporters also only amplifies their collective irrationality.